134 réponses à ce sujet

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

 

Modifié par mrcrusty, 14 novembre 2012 - 05:54 .

[alex90c]

tbh, everyone agrees with your posts it's just because of that there's no need for us to reply because we agree with everything

/agrees

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Modifié par CrustyBot, 14 novembre 2012 - 05:55 .

[Morroian]

Even as 1 who likes DA2 some of those ideas can only improve on it. Shrodingers Tree... I like it, keep the name.

One question is having cunning affect both critical chance and damage unbalanced?

[eroeru]

Really nice ideas. Good that you made a specific thread out of it.

Though I'd add the link to the discussion I very much appreciated from the hard-to-RP-thread:
http://social.biowar...06371/5#8622234

Modifié par eroeru, 03 novembre 2011 - 10:57 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Modifié par CrustyBot, 14 novembre 2012 - 05:55 .

[Atakuma]

You did a really good job on this, it's really well thought out. I have to say I agree on pretty much everything aside from crafting, which always gives me a headache.

[staindgrey]

I'm most interested in seeing your ideas regarding sculpting narrative through proper use of dialogue and characterization.

I'll be honest rather than ignorant: The classic RPG aspects of RPGs are my least favorite parts of RPGs. Item hoarding and mundane micromanagement bore me, spell/power customization isn't really a selling point, currency systems, to me, shouldn't play such a huge part that it detracts from me simply playing, yada yada...

In short, DAII catered to people like me. It's for that reason that I enjoyed DAII more. I appreciate DA:O's story, characters and branching choices far more than DAII's, but that still couldn't counteract the fact that the gameplay itself just bored me. It was tedious, monotonous and about as thrilling as watching the final few weeks of a baseball team who's been out of the playoff race since July.

So anyway, the point here is I want to see, OP, what you would like to do regarding crafting story and moral choice. I'm looking forward to your post regarding that. As for your other changes mentioned so far... I'm sure they're nice. I just couldn't care less. Lol.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

staindgrey wrote...

For me, it's not about "classic RPG aspects", it's about roleplaying. I enjoy non classical RPGs as much as any other - the thing is that the non classical RPGs I enjoy fall under simiar design principles - games like Fallout: New Vegas, Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines, Deus Ex, etc.

The character system is absolutely essential to the roleplaying experience because it provides a foundation and framework of what your character is actually able to do. Statisical representation of the character.

Ultima has it, Baldur's Gate has it, Fallout has it and Elder Scrolls has it.

In this sense, Dragon Age 2 completely and utterly fails as a good system for roleplaying. This is not a "personal preference" thing like say, voiced/unvoiced, it is objective - Dragon Age 2 has a crappy character system for roleplaying. On low difficulties it's almost irrelevant to the character and at higher levels, it encourages all sorts of metagaming.

To add to that, RPGs ought to have the gameplay to make use of a character system. That means multiple solutions and approaches. I think that the stealth section in MotA was a very small but significant step forward for BioWare here. I like it when quests are broad objectives, free to let the player approach it from a variety of situations.

Let's say, "get money from merchant who's protected by thugs" becomes a quest. The typical BioWarean method is to send you from point A to point B, talk with the merchant and then fight the thugs, talk to the merchant again and get his money. Every single time. Boring.

What if you could sneak past all the thugs and pickpocket the merchant outright? What if you could break open his money chest and steal his merchant funds? What if you could snipe all of the thugs from long range? Or take the entire lot of them out in a full frontal assualt, looting the merchant's corpse? Or doing it by accident, collateral damage? What if you could send a party member to distract all the thugs, allowing you to persuade or intimidate the merchant one on one?

You've got sneak mechanics, you've got aggro mechanics, Origins has theft mechanics. The only thing you'd have to change to give the player all these options in Dragon Age 2's current design is make the merchant hostile and trigger a cutscene conversation if all the thugs are dead or leave the area. That, and plunk down a locked chest. Yet so many options open up once they try and improve quest design.

Fallout was doing this crap in 1997, Planescape in 1999 and Arcanum in 2001. So open ended gameplay through quest design is not impossible for a traditional RPG.

The idea is that if you have the right framework for roleplaying (character systems), then make sure your gameplay is designed to take advantage of it.

In terms of characterization, doing it through dialog systems without gameplay to accompany it will never, ever be fully satisfying. Because at the end of the day, it's the one element that's wholly scripted and limited by the developers. Stealth has elements of randomization, so does combat. So will crafting, and trap placement. You can't always predict the AI or "invisible dice". In dialog however, there is no element of randomization and unless you shoehorn yourself into the responses or the writing itself is Godly, it'll be an important element of roleplaying, but not one that can stand on it's own. Might as well read choose your own adventure books instead.

Honestly, if I wanted a game with amazing dialog with patchy gameplay, I'd just play Planescape: Torment again.

Because it has pretty open ended gameplay (even though stacking INT and WIS and becoming a brainiac scholar is always the best method) and doesn't have (and here's my next point) massive gameplay/story segregation.

If the story is to have any integrity at all in a game, then major plot elements in the story ought to affect gameplay. The Nameless One's immortality means that he doesn't die in the game, just wakes up in the Mortuary. The Cowled Wizards actually enforce the rules in Athkatla. You can die in The Glow from radiation if you spend too much time there. Being a Nosferatu means that you have to hide yourself from public eyes and use the sewer systems to travel or risk losing the support of the Masquerade.

The lack of reaction from people for being a Blood Mage, or use Magic in public is absolutely shocking, and to just handwave with "well, that's the way things are" is a terrible stance to take for a story oriented company because gameplay/story segregation speaks to the suspension of disbelief. What it does is take a major plot element which takes a significant amount of focus in the game, then shatter it's premise and contradict it's implications for the entirety of the game.

Using Blood Magic in the Gallows in Dragon Age 2 imo is equivalent to Frodo putting on the Ring of Power on the steps of Mt. Doom and having Sauron not notice.

It makes the game and it's story a whole lot less credible. The smaller the plot element, the less it becomes a problem, however, Blood Magic, Mages and Templars are central to Dragon Age 2's narrative.

To that end, I don't really care too much about the intricacies and details of the narrative (let the writers worry about that) other than "choices have consequences, so show them or don't offer choices at all!"

Choices don't refer to just narrative choices, but gameplay ones too. Picking a Mage on character creation, deciding to steal from an important NPC instead of helping him. The best ones however, don't feel like either gameplay or narrative choices - they feel like roleplaying choices and have an affect on both.

You don't need a lot of groundbreaking, world changing choices to make you feel like you're weaving your own narrative - you only need to demonstrate consequences for them and have specific branching content as a result. Choosing the Mercs or Smugglers to get into Kirkwall should've determined your quests in Act 1. The main plot essentially doesn't change much, you pickup followers and money for the expedition but you showcase different characters and a different part of Kirkwallian society.

Another way to do this is something I like to call "same event, different points of view". That is, to get branching questlines and narratives, have them centered around the same event or story but have players approach them from different viewpoints depending on their choices.

A perfect example of this is in New Vegas, the "Arizona Killer" quest for Legion characters and "You'll know when it happens" for everyone else. As a Legion character, you're tasked to Assassinate the President of the NCR. As the others, you're tasked to stop an Assassination attempt on him. This is especially fun because of the quest design is very good - it's open ended, caters to a variety of different characters and can be done in a somewhat non-linear fashion.

Now getting to conversational systems - I think that there is much room for improvement on personalities and how to integrate parts of the character system into the conversation (skill checks). With Dragon Age 2's cinematic and voiced focus however, I don't think it's possible to implement the finer points of my ideas.

What I do think should happen in this kinda of system is that there should be less dialog prompts but more meaningful ones. So basically, you don't need to choose every line, but you need to choose a direction and let the character role with that in more meaningful conversations. Basically, you only need to choose a few dialog options at important points of the conversation rather than choosing each new line.

FASherman proposed a good personality system to work under here and I posted my ideas on it under that system here.

I'd also talk about skill checks too, but BioWare doesn't know how to structure them outside of an I win button and apparently people hate that their character build bleeds through to dialog.

So I'll settle for a better character system with better quest design.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 03 novembre 2011 - 11:43 .

[eyesofastorm]

You are a visionary mccrusty. Are you in game design? If not, why not? Alas, I think the question comes down to whether Bioware wants to make a deeper role playing game or to continue down the action path. I don't think anyone doubts what they are capable of. The reason I hang around and I think the reason many of the DA2 "haters" hang around is to see if Bioware will choose to do what we know they are capable of doing better than anyone else in the AAA arena or if they have truly committed to the path that they started down with DA2. DA2 might have been a mistake depending on your point of view (hard to argue based on sales between O and 2), but it wasn't an accident. It's all about intent at this point. That said, if they should choose to turn the bus around again, they could do much worse than to bring you on as a high level designer.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Lol. Thanks. Right now I'm just trying to keep my head above water. I eventually want to get into Systems Analysis though. Game Designer sounds fun but not something I'm actually interested in doing. Plus, I doubt I'd have the skills for it. I talk a good talk, but any game I'd design would probably be a massive flop.

[eyesofastorm]

mrcrusty wrote...

Lol. Thanks. Right now I'm just trying to keep my head above water. I eventually want to get into Systems Analysis though. Game Designer sounds fun but not something I'm actually interested in doing. Plus, I doubt I'd have the skills for it. I talk a good talk, but any game I'd design would probably be a massive flop.

Oh, I'm sure there's much more to it that I don't know about... a thousand roadblocks to the implementation of ideas that seem obvious and easy to many of us, but there is that old adage about finding a way to get paid for the things that you would do just for enjoyment.  When I see the amount of thought and clarity that you brought to bear in the making of this thread, I see the definition of that adage.  That's all I was saying.  Besides, I know a few Systems Analysts and what they do... your talents would be wasted there... though probably better compensated.  

[Eudaemonium]

These are all fantastic ideas. There isn't really much else to say. Even coming from someone who loves DA2 as much as me, these would definitely have improved the experience.

[Morroian]

mrcrusty wrote...

FASherman proposed a good personality system to work under here and I posted my ideas on it under that system here.

I agree with you your statement in that thread:

mrcrusty wrote...
NPCs could be linked to a disposition system, meaning that if you bring skill checks back in, you could bypass the instant win mentality use them to help you get a desired outcome rather than immediately getting it. 

After playing Deus Ex HR, I've been of the opinion that something of the sort, along with the personaility types, could be used with a DEUS Ex HR style conversation minigame.

[eroeru]

This is the stuff all the complainers were looking for - only that no-one was really able to pull it off (as far as I've seen). Heck, I might stop lurking on other threads, this seems the best answer to DA2 - good, clear and in a form of constructive proposals. From the little I know - game companies should make a job proposal...

[Barry Bathernak]

@staindgrey

did you really just call ORIGINS tedious when compared to d.a.2!? since that's just lunacy and absurd since d.a.2 in terms of both combat and dialogue all you have to do is hit the A (or the respective pc key) as fast as you can without breaking the button/key.

it also sounds like you just want a button masher/hack-n-slash with any form of story,so why not play something like god of war,dynasty warriors,or even infamous?

[Morroian]

Barry Bathernak wrote...

@staindgrey

did you really just call ORIGINS tedious when compared to d.a.2!? since that's just lunacy and absurd since d.a.2 in terms of both combat and dialogue all you have to do is hit the A (or the respective pc key) as fast as you can without breaking the button/key.

it also sounds like you just want a button masher/hack-n-slash with any form of story,so why not play something like god of war,dynasty warriors,or even infamous?

Please stop, don't turn this into another bashing thread.

[Salaya]

Impressive work -very interesting ideas, specially about commerce, and weapon proficencies (if I understood the chart xD).

But, don't you think dialog skills in the lines of persuasioon should be implemented too? I think there is room for improvement by adding diplomacy and similar traits to the gameplay core. Refinign a system that puts in motion cunning and force as primary attributtes to determine their efectiveness.

With this, I mean something similar to Origins, but with some complexity, that allows diplomacy and quick talking as a relevant part of RP. For example -every player could acces a "persuasion" option in dialogues, but only players with high cunning or specialized in "diplomatic" skills are able to see the better options (high cunning, high socialm skill=more refined dialog lines, beter chance of success).

It's only a improvised idea, but I'm certain that the diplomatic RP could be reflected perfectly with better gameplay systems

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Why you gotta go there, mang?

I had hoped to leave that topic out because I want to focus on what I know are reasonable ideas. I had structured my ideas on three pillars: Attribute tweaking, Talent Tree redesign/expansion and non-combat additions.

All of these are firmly anchored in Dragon Age 2's system, or Dragon Age: Origins', ensuring that they aren't beyond the realm of plausibility. If I wanted an "ideal" character system, I'd make an entire ruleset up, ask them to port GURPS or modify the D20 ruleset. None of that is reasonable, though.

The biggest changes in my suggestions would be the non combat additions, which really just harkens back to crafting systems in games like Neverwinter Nights 2, or to a lesser extent, the KotOR games. The infiltration/stealth skills were already being worked on by BioWare (MotA) and all Commerce does is modify relationships and trading rates with vendors.

So nothing there is either too new, or unpalatable for BioWare.

If we get into the issue of dialog systems, personality systems, social skills and skill checks, I've got a million ideas, few of which are remotely realistic.

I have a system in my head that could possibly work with how Dragon Age 2 operates (cinematic, voiced, etc) and I will probably elaborate tomorrow. But for now, I'd probably prefer people to stay on topic, that is - feedback, comments or your own ideas in regards to character systems, gameplay design and how it relates to roleplaying for Dragon Age 2 or future games. (Social skills being apart of character building notwithstanding).

Modifié par mrcrusty, 04 novembre 2011 - 01:46 .

[Salaya]

mrcrusty wrote...

Why you gotta go there, mang?

I had hoped to leave that topic out because I want to focus on what I know are reasonable ideas. I had structured my ideas on three pillars: Attribute tweaking, Talent Tree redesign/expansion and non-combat additions.

...

Ok, sorry; I just pointed at persuasion because I was surprised it was absent. Obviously, I think it's a reasonable element to add on future games.

Modifié par Salaya, 04 novembre 2011 - 02:52 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

I honestly do too, but I have it linked to a massive dialog system redesign which itself isn't really reasonable.

[AlexXIV]

I am not really into maths so I don't know if your numbers any good. But what I don't see in your equation is health. I always felt that having a healthbar and fighting just with the same skill no matter if you are at 99% or 1% is silly. I personally think that your stats should go down if you are, say below 50% health, then 25%, 10% etc. Or add bleeding at a certain health level because it would only be reasonable that someone who is hurt really badly would die by him/herself at a certain point with wounds untended.

Also maybe a good idea would be weapon specialisation and focus. Much like they do in D&D. So you can use many weapons but focus in few and maybe specialize in only one. Also you could train and use styles. For example defensive style, balanced or aggressive styles. Would give more variation to combat.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

AlexXIV wrote...

I am not really into maths so I don't know if your numbers any good. But what I don't see in your equation is health. I always felt that having a healthbar and fighting just with the same skill no matter if you are at 99% or 1% is silly. I personally think that your stats should go down if you are, say below 50% health, then 25%, 10% etc. Or add bleeding at a certain health level because it would only be reasonable that someone who is hurt really badly would die by him/herself at a certain point with wounds untended.

Also maybe a good idea would be weapon specialisation and focus. Much like they do in D&D. So you can use many weapons but focus in few and maybe specialize in only one. Also you could train and use styles. For example defensive style, balanced or aggressive styles. Would give more variation to combat.

I agree with your ideas in theory, but the stuff about health and new status effects don't really work with Dragon Age 2's system. Dragon Age 2's combat is fast paced and allows for the massive fluctuation in health due to the speed, hp regen, cooldowns, etc.

In an ideal world, the next Dragon Age game would have combat with the speed of Origins and the presentation of KotOR. It would have a variety of physical status effects - Poison, Bleeding, Burn, Frostbite, Paralysis and Crippling which inflict a whole host of penalties from Attribute Damage, to DoT, to Reduced Stats, etc. Being like KotOR, combat would be synced allowing for a good rounds based system with command stacking, without losing cinematic or cool visuals.

In this ideal world, there would also be a chance for Talents to miss and spells to fail/miss. Doesn't make sense that a novice Mage can always aim that fireball perfectly every single time and I'd have my proficiency system (which I already have if you read the Talent redesign section) geared towards accuracy and secondary effects rather than damage.

There would be a focus on low HP and high attack rates, meaning that both PCs and NPCs have equivalent HP and both can be taken out within a matter of 3-5 attacks. The most ardent "tank" could get blown away in seconds by 4-5 bandits, hopefully moving away from an MMO based party roles system (tank, DD, healer, etc), encouraging tactical placement, flanking and use of the environment.

Being outnumbered becomes a desperate struggle - a defensive formation, good tactics and superb execution winning you the day, rather than the "cut through a dozen mooks, get one-shotted by the Lieutenant" system of Dragon Age 2. Conversely, you wouldn't need a reinforcement system as 6-7 guys is damn threatening to your party. A reinforcement system could be used for particular encounters and really make players ****** themselves instead of going "here we go again..."

Hell, I'd even take a page out of Total War and ask to add in a morale system.

The truth is however, that's not gonna happen and no amount of wishing or long posts will "make it so". At best, they can balance the combat better. Dragon Age 2 will be the foundation for Dragon Age 3 (you're deluding yourselves if you believe otherwise) and a radical redesign of how combat works is not in the cards unless BioWare indicates otherwise. I'd like to give my ideas with that in mind.

That way, there's at least the minor hope that they will get implemented or receive actual feedback and discussion from BioWare. Which is what I want from this really, feedback discussion and maybe implementation.

Also, I like the idea of combat stances. KotOR 2 had them. But I feel like they could become mututally exclusive Sustained Abilities in some of the Specialization Trees.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 05 novembre 2011 - 01:15 .

[TheRealJayDee]

Fantastic thread! Great ideas, well thought out, equally well presented. Hopefully this will not be tainted by the usual pro/anti discussions. I'll definitely watch this thread, kudos mrcrusty!

[Shadow6773]

Mrcrusty- Please tell me that you are a Bioware game designer on the team for DA3 come to the forums in disguise as a way to test the waters for your ideas. On second thought, just lie to me and say yes. At this point I need a morale system as much as DA3 needs much of yours.

That being said I am curious what you have to say about the dialog system in the next days as I have many gripes and sadly far less ideas/fixes concerning it. My major one being how the wheel is a limiter on conversation options and has now becomes predictable(boring) with companion reactions. Compounding this is the fact that the more voice acting is added the more the budget goes in the pooper and the less they seem to want to add. I like the voiced main but don't like not knowing what they will say. Basically just adding an icon for one tone in a society where half of our conversation is layered or has none in many cases does not fit. Honestly It feels more like their own character then mine when I am tied down with a few options and does not help with my game immersion. I know they will not step back into a silent protagonist so that is obviously out of the question.

So far the best voiced system I have seen was the Witcher 2 as far as conversation and good use of paraphrasing. However that one is not really based on an rpg create your own character system (in SOME ways a bad fit for the game IMO as I lean more towards DAO style) and while that game had a branching story line it was not as vast as I would have in DA3. I'm am at a loss with how to fix the dialog wheel monster they have created. The original idea is good but seems to have suffered from poor implementation like much of DA3 creating more problems then fixes with the addition of a voiced main. I am curious to see your thoughts and ideas. Hopefully this thread stays objective.